2nd hand smoking

theunknown · New User Joined: 05 Feb 2006 Posts: 1

hello all i have a question could anyone answer?

i was woundering if i could get lung cancer from 17 years of 2nd hand smoke.

brainman · Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 10:55 pm Post subject: Second Hand Smoking

There is a certain statistical probability of you getting cancer by 17 years of second hand smoke. What the exact numbers are, I am not sure. I don't know if anyone can give you a definitive answer. Why do you ask?
_________________
Jim
Site Administrator and long-term cancer survivor
1992 Astrocytoma grade 2, left motor strip
2005 Recurrence this time said to be an Oligodendoglioma grade 3, same location.
My Story Part 1: http://cancerforums.net/viewtopic.php?p=7350
My Story Part 2: http://cancerforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=8029
Blog http://jimhawkinsport.blogspot.com/

mikes · Senior User Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 143

In the 40 years since 1965 the smoking rate in the United States has been cut by almost a factor of 3 while during the same period, the death rate from lung cancer has risen by 3 times.

Japan has one of the highest smoking rates in the world and one of the lowest lung cancer rates.

The purpose of my pointing this out is not to encourage anyone to smoke, but rather to point out that there is a documented negative corelation between smoking and lung cancer death rates.

This more than strongly suggests that the real cause of this disease is something other than smoking and ETS.

As long as the trend is to blame smoking for the problem (which it is), the real cause(s) will continue to be unknown and the disease will continue to progress as it has.

When you see figures that 87% of lung cancer occurs in smokers, few realize the standard for who is a smoker is very misleading. If you had a pack or two in your entire life... you are a smoker.

Many people and organizations are blaming people's cancer on smoking when the facts just don't support it. The real casualty is the lack of finding the real cause(s) and the thousands of people who suffer because of it.

The "common knowledge" of our day is the smoking is the main cause of lung cancer. In George Washington's day it was that most people (including doctors) believed that blood letting was the cure for many maladies. When George became ill with a respiratory problem, the doctor came to his home and let blood. He died. Barbers in this country routinely let blood for customers in this country into the early 1900's. For those not aware, that is why the barbers symbol is the pole with red and blue stripes on it.

The "common knowledge" for every society since recorded history has almost invariably been proven to be wrong and later ridiculed by later generations. But the "common knowledge" for any given generation rarely dies during the life of that generation. It lives on despite eveidence and proof to the contrary because it is inculcated by repetitive and unfounded statements by the powers that be which are rarely questioned.

False "common knowledge" has caused a lot of pain and suffering through the ages. As a last example, consider the Salem Witchcraft trials. Everyone "knew" that these innocent ladies were possessed by demons.

Anyone trying to convince someone in George Washington's day that blood letting was harmful would have received the same response as I sometimes do when I show scientific eveidence and graphs concerning the smoking/cancer issue.

Every dollar and every hour spent on blaming smoking for the problem is time and money that could have been spent on finding the real cause and cure.

brainman · Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 11:45 pm Post subject: Re: 2nd hand smoking

Mike, I noticed that you are only talking about smoking and cancer. What about the thousands who die due to COPD, vascular diseases, and heart failure? In addition, the baby-boomers who started smoking 40 years ago are now beginning to have lunge cancer.

I do not want to make anyone here feel guilty because they are/were smokers and now have cancer. You are right, Mike, it is not that clear cut. However, the case against smoking is undeniable strong.
_________________
Jim
Site Administrator and long-term cancer survivor
1992 Astrocytoma grade 2, left motor strip
2005 Recurrence this time said to be an Oligodendoglioma grade 3, same location.
My Story Part 1: http://cancerforums.net/viewtopic.php?p=7350
My Story Part 2: http://cancerforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=8029
Blog http://jimhawkinsport.blogspot.com/

mikes · Senior User Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 143

Hi Jim,

I felt that my post was getting a little long winded, so I limited my response to cancer since this is a cancer forum.

There are a number of studies questioning the facts concerning the other diseases you described. I recently saw an interesting report from the CATO institute showing step-by-step how various organiztions "cherry picked" facts and changed thresholds and standards to "prove" their point using taxpayer dollars to do it.

I never said that there might not be a downside to smoking, and I never encouraged anyone to start. I even resisted the temptation to point out that few smokers get Altsheimer's disease or that a particular breast cancer study at a major medical center showed conclusively that a particular type of brease cancer is less prevalent in smoking women. These are all distractions from my main point.

For over 40 years since the Surgeon Generals report in 1965 people have stopped smoking in great numbers (from 53% to 21%) while lung cancer just continues to rise at a truly alarming rate. Something must be done before the disease continues to grow even more. If cutting smoking were the solution, we wouldn't be where we are now.

Regards,

Mike

	Cancer Forums Forum Index -> General Cancer topics	All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

A website for discussions about any type of cancer, including lung cancer, breast cancer, mesothelioma, prostate cancer, laryngeal cancer, leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma and others